Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.

The summary following each opinion is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what a particular opinion decides. The summary is not necessarily a full description of the
issues discussed in an opinion.

This case involves the interpretation of penal statutes imposing a duty on the record holder of a mortgage on real estate to enter a satisfaction of the mortgage in the proper office, upon the occurrence of certain conditions. The sole condition before us relates to the requirement in sections 29-3-310 and 320 of the South Carolina Code (2007), that the mortgagor request the mortgagee enter the satisfaction. In this case, we hold the mortgagor did not make such a request.

In this case, the magistrate held a probable cause hearing on Respondent Jimmy Ramsey’s criminal domestic violence charge and dismissed it for lack of probable cause. The circuit court affirmed the magistrate’s finding. On appeal, the State claimed the magistrate erred in holding a probable cause hearing and dismissing Respondent’s CDV charge. This Court holds that the magistrate did not have the authority to hold a preliminary hearing on the CDV charge, and therefore reverses and remands the case to the magistrate for summary disposition.

The Court has amended Rules 225, 608, and Canon 3, Rule 501, SCACR, to correct a number of internal references based on the fact the General Assembly transferred the South Carolina Children’s Code from S.C. Code Ann. § 20-7-10 et seq. to a new title in the Code, Title 63.

In this case, Appellant filed a declaratory judgment action seeking to declare an underlying magistrate’s judgment void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The master-in-equity found in favor of Respondent. On appeal, Appellant claimed that the magistrate lacked jurisdiction to render the underlying judgment. The Court holds that the magistrate’s subject matter jurisdiction was passed upon in the underlying suit and therefore became the law of the case. The Court declines to reopen that issue in this subsequent action.

We granted the petition for a writ of certiorari by Smith Construction and its insurer to consider the meaning of the phrase "engaged to perform work" as used in section 42-1-415 of the South Carolina Code.

The Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals and held it will no longer entertain petitions for writs of certiorari where the Court of Appeals has dismissed an appeal after conducting a review pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

The Court has amended Rules 1.0 and 1.15(f), RPC, Rule 407, SCACR, concerning the definition of the term depository institution. The Court has also amended Rule 412, SCACR, to correctly state a credit union is insured by the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund.